To not understand why Nicky Morgan is looking towards the US for a replacement OFSTED Chief

[ReallyTired]

The USA is hardly the centre of educational excellent or high achievement. The fact that people like Donald Trump are popular in the US, or the right to bare arms shows that American educators hardly excel at the development of critical thinking skills in american citizens.

Why doesn't the UK recruit someone from Finland or Singapore? Or maybe a truely outstanding headteacher who works in the UK. At least the likes of Sir Michael Wilshaw has some idea of what its like to teach in an English classroom.

Surely it's because they are looking for someone to follow the Government agenda, rather than someone who knows a lot about education in the UK, and knows what works and what is making the whole system collapse. The Government aren't really interested in the welfare of all our children, or listening to people who actually work in schools, in LAs, as CMs, in CCs, in Nurseries, etc.,etc. though, are they? They just want to pluck an idea out of the air and impose it.

Nicky Morgan wants schools run like businesses, turned in to academies (run by academy chains) and the destruction of any resistance by teachers, an american business type will push to get her the results that she wants and not be overly bothered with any casualties on the way.

I agree with the six year inspections gap. My kids attend a school that was last inspected six years ago. Sadly I have no confidence that the school will het to rating they deserve. I won't say what I think they deserve because I will get accused of school bashing

Backforgood, if that's the case, doesn't makes Ofsted irrelevent and unfit for purpose?
Ofsted should be impartial if it is to inspect with any degree of integrity...

doesn't makes Ofsted irrelevent and unfit for purpose?

You said it. Of course it's unfit for purpose.

Of course any inspectors should be impartial / not connected to the school (or company or any other thing that gets inspected), but they should have a good working knowledge of whatever it is they are inspecting - as, tbf, most OFSTED teams have traditionally been. The issues have been magnified by the politically driven agendas they have to work within, rather than going in to a school (or anywhere else they are inspecting) with an open mind, to see how the school (etc) operates, and find what is good about it, and what could be improved.

I couldn't agree more with the OP. During the 80s and 90s as a primary teacher I battled with imported American ideas, the worst being Emergent Writing, which is responsible for so much of the poor spelling and grammar of people who were educated then. They are also responsible for S.A T.s, which have not been a resounding success.

Finland has a remarkable record of consistently producing well-educated pupils, without massive amounts of testing and analysis; they do, of course, insist on properly trained teachers.
They also speak better English than the Americans.

Hell will freeze over before a system like Finland's will be considered, sadly.

There's been a drive to get more "serving practitioners" into school inspection teams - so since the outsourcing came to an end and the contacting of inspectors was brought back in-house, 70% of Ofsted's contracted inspectors are currently serving heads or senior leaders in well-rated schools. And if their school gets itself downgraded, their contract will be stopped.

But that's the view of the current HMCI, who was a serving headteacher. He doesn't get any say in his replacement, and nor does anyone else within Ofsted - it's a government appointment. Great for impartiality!

Surely it's because they are looking for someone to follow the Government agenda, rather than someone who knows a lot about education in the UK

And the winner is ....

Finland- because teachers are paid more, students are rarely tested, class sizes are small, the government do not interfere in schools, continual assessment is valued over testing, teachers are trusted to get n and do what is professionally right. And they take the PIsa tests with a pinch of salt.

Singapore- because it is a ludicrous system which values mindless tasks like rote learning, copying and completing oage after age of work that children can already do - as a form of classroom control rather than actual learning. It also discrimnates against the poor and favours the rich. Even the Tories would not dare go as far as turning to Singapore.

Well the fact Finland pays its teachers more rules that one one.

Cost cutting and intrusive monitoring are the watchwords.

From Wikipedia

Both primary and secondary teachers must have a master's degree to qualify. Teaching is a respected profession and entrance to university programs is highly competitive. A prospective teacher must have very good grades and must combat fierce opposition in order to become a teacher.[30] Only about 10% of applicants to certain programs are successful.[citation needed] The respect accorded to the profession and the higher salaries than the OECD average lead to higher performing and larger numbers applying for the positions, and this is reflected in the quality of teachers in Finland.

I assume they're looking abroad because no bugger here wants the role. Head of Ofsted? That has to be a conversation killer at parties. Probably better to say that you test cosmetics on puppies.

Non-story. Already everyone on the made-up list of 'possibles' that the media cobbled together in order to add some kind of weight to this latest bit of speculation ("erm... that Lemov chap; people have heard of him, right?") has expressed utter bemusement at the idea that they might even consider such a role, were they to be approached about it. Which they haven't been.

You said it. Of course it's unfit for purpose.

I did, didn't I?

Some years ago, I was inspected by a very knowledgeable lady. She'd worked as a childminder, teacher and headteacher and she was highly qualified. She knew her job inside out.
They got rid of that calibre of inspector - too expensive - and outsourced it all.

Outsourced has now been reversed by OFSTED in the latest review of the framework.

Passing schools over to the private sector was inevitable - the wastage and inefficiencies within the system for years were inexcusable.

I've personally encountered situations where non teaching staff members have been paid extra hours each week for made up 'non-jobs' in order to boost their wages and hours (such as an extra hour a day to water the plants). Many schools had, and some still have, piles of unused and unsuitable resources and consumables - bought without consideration to future use it value. I'm not just referring to the odd one or two schools - this was commonplace in all the schools/LA depts in the County I worked in.

And the Unions resisted the attempts to change things.

Sadly, too many schools (and LA's) have demonstrated incompetence in the recent past when it comes to financial management, hence the move to create a more 'commercial' environment. I don't agree with it, but am at a loss as to what the alternative is as the wastage and inefficiency had to be addressed.

Not in the Early Years. Early Years remains outsourced.

And the Unions resisted the attempts to change things.

Unions can only resist changes to terms and conditions.
The problem has been that schools have only been able to contract in government approved contractors who that sell shoddy goods and produce shoddy work for over the odds money.

"I've personally encountered situations where non teaching staff members have been paid extra hours each week for made up 'non-jobs' in order to boost their wages and hours (such as an extra hour a day to water the plants). Many schools had, and some still have, piles of unused and unsuitable resources and consumables - bought without consideration to future use it value. I'm not just referring to the odd one or two schools - this was commonplace in all the schools/LA depts in the County I worked in. "

That has never happened in schoolsI worked in. Staff tend to work well over their contracted hours doing jobs that are not in their job description. Most teachers work all the hours that gawd send. TA are often found doing jobs way beyond their job spec.

"Many schools had, and some still have, piles of unused and unsuitable resources and consumables - bought without consideration to future use it value. I'm not just referring to the odd one or two schools - this was commonplace in all the schools/LA depts in the County I worked in. "

There might be an element of truth in this. It is caused by the stupid policy that a budget is reduced if a department does not spend allocated money. Its common place in all govenment departments from the LEA to the civil service and whitehall. I don't see how bringing in an American to run OFSTED will resolve this issue.

I would argue that there is little evidence that American public services are run any more efficently. Sometimes its cheaper just to accept a little waste. The American health system is an example of a lot of expense and poorer outcomes than the NHS. Privatisation rarely results in savings.

It just sums up this current govt IMO.

Its either the height of irony, or just taking the piss.

I suspect this is a non-story. However, I should point out that there is no "U.S. education system" any more than there is a "British education system". Each of the 50 states runs its own education, and the quality varies accordingly, from abysmal to extremely good. Massachusetts has plenty of disadvantaged kids, but if it were an independent country it would score 9th on the list for PISA.

Because Nicky Morgan doesn't know what she's doing in her role and fancies a little tax payer trip to the USA?

Unions can only resist changes to terms and conditions.

Actually that's not really true. They do a lot of press releases and media appearances, as well as surveys, to try to manipulate the agenda in the direction they favour. I remember well Christine Blower on radio and TV 10 years ago arguing against the introduction of phonics (and clearly demonstrating her profound ignorance on the subject).

I assume they're looking abroad because no bugger here wants the role.

Noble, that was my first thought too!

Hell will freeze over before a system like Finland's will be considered, sadly.

You're right: for one thing, the complete lack of differentiation (all mixed ability) would be very off-putting to a lot of parents.

Also, there are many teachers who would dislike the fact that Finnish teaching methods are, on the whole, not all that "progressive" - there is little group work, lots of teacher-talk, lots of textbooks, desks face the front even in primary school.